Would be acceptable if allowing more mid-majors in to compete. Expanding to let in more 6-12 conference record majors? I’m with the no-go crowd then.
NCAA Tournament Expands to 76 teams
- Thread starter ISU3PtLand
- Start date
Miami OH goes undefeated in the regular season. Their reward - a play-in game. I would hate to be a mid-major fan, all about winning the conference tournament.
Guessing all the 16s will become play ins. The other eight games will feature some 12s, all the 11s then some 10s.
I get your thought but I am more inclined to think they'll include teams that are from power leagues. The viewership if all the play in games are 16s? No one would care.
So is the NIT going to fold then? Cause it seems that this would also further water down that tournament.
31 conferences from 366 schools.
76-seat tourney seems so skimpy. And what are they going to call the winners after the first round?
The Dirty-Thirty-Ate?
Then on to the Nifty Nineteen.
At least make it 80 teams in the first round. That divides out by two each time much better than 76.
After the first round, it's the Sporty Forty.
Second round winners are the Plenty Twenty.
Next elimination, the Ten Men.
And then, the Five Left Alive.
Ruh-roh.
Not sure how you get an even number of weeners from five teams, though.
In the end, how does this not become a Squid Game for roundballers?
No doubt abouddit, if they gonna expand the field, it has to be to be divisible by 2 at each level.
(That means 128 teams for anyone up in the cheap math seats.)
76-seat tourney seems so skimpy. And what are they going to call the winners after the first round?
The Dirty-Thirty-Ate?
Then on to the Nifty Nineteen.
At least make it 80 teams in the first round. That divides out by two each time much better than 76.
After the first round, it's the Sporty Forty.
Second round winners are the Plenty Twenty.
Next elimination, the Ten Men.
And then, the Five Left Alive.
Ruh-roh.
Not sure how you get an even number of weeners from five teams, though.
In the end, how does this not become a Squid Game for roundballers?
No doubt abouddit, if they gonna expand the field, it has to be to be divisible by 2 at each level.
(That means 128 teams for anyone up in the cheap math seats.)
I guess I'm less bothered by this than most people. As a college basketball fan and March Madness junkie, more games is better and the traditional 64 teams starting on Thursday stays intact so I'm good with it. I can see an argument for it cheapening the regular season a bit for teams on the bubble but it seems fine to me.
The article very clearly stated several times that this was not about money but the expenses will be covered. I do wonder whether the unit payouts per game played goes down. Cause if the P5 leagues are pushing for more of their teams then the single units the majority of mid major leagues get reduced. It just means more money for the big leagues and less for the small ones.
If the 16s are all playins that’s four of the 12 games. Two sites two days they could play the 16s at like 3:30 for the true junkies. Then all at large teams in the later slots.
Probably. I’d like if they’d do something like the Sanford Pentagon in Sioux Falls. But I assume easy access to an airport will be important.
Cinderella was on life support, now she's dead.
Your 12s were already struggling to win anymore and now they're going to be 14s so we can get a couple extra ****** power league teams in.
I can feel the electricity of Rutgers v Mississippi State in a half empty building in Vegas on a Tuesday afternoon!
Your 12s were already struggling to win anymore and now they're going to be 14s so we can get a couple extra ****** power league teams in.
I can feel the electricity of Rutgers v Mississippi State in a half empty building in Vegas on a Tuesday afternoon!
And it will mostly be P4 programs. At this point, missing the tournament is a fireable offense.
Go to 96.
All conference champions (the #1 seed in your tournament) quality.
All conference tournament champions qualify.
In the case where those two are the same team, then the runner-up of your conference tournament takes the second slot (which keeps the bid "alive" for everybody into that last week).
There's 31 conferences right now.
31 * 2 = 62
96 - 62 = 34 at-large bids
Currently there's 37 at-large bids, so this system would actually tighten it up a bit.
Rewards consistency and a late, clutch push and gives mid- and low-majors more of a chance.
Tournament format is similar to the one now only with #1 through #24. Six teams in 16 "pods" in the opening weekend, two "play-in games" to the regular 64-team tournament, nothing changes from there.
A #2 seed would be looking at...
#2
---
#15 / #18
#7
---
#10 / #23
Landing a top-eight seed in your regional (so the top 32) becomes valuable for the bye.
Not going to happen... the whole point of this exercise is to get more mediocre-to-bad Big Ten and SEC teams into the tournament... but it's the world we live in with college sports nowadays.
All conference champions (the #1 seed in your tournament) quality.
All conference tournament champions qualify.
In the case where those two are the same team, then the runner-up of your conference tournament takes the second slot (which keeps the bid "alive" for everybody into that last week).
There's 31 conferences right now.
31 * 2 = 62
96 - 62 = 34 at-large bids
Currently there's 37 at-large bids, so this system would actually tighten it up a bit.
Rewards consistency and a late, clutch push and gives mid- and low-majors more of a chance.
Tournament format is similar to the one now only with #1 through #24. Six teams in 16 "pods" in the opening weekend, two "play-in games" to the regular 64-team tournament, nothing changes from there.
A #2 seed would be looking at...
#2
---
#15 / #18
#7
---
#10 / #23
Landing a top-eight seed in your regional (so the top 32) becomes valuable for the bye.
Not going to happen... the whole point of this exercise is to get more mediocre-to-bad Big Ten and SEC teams into the tournament... but it's the world we live in with college sports nowadays.
